QPR - Back from watching on TV

[LoyalRoyalFan]

Well that's not strictly true is it?

Most of our bad performances and poor goals conceded have originated from Ian Harte.

Obviously a wind-up.

Try looking at each goal, one-by-one, carefully and assign responsibility.

Mills, Zurab, Howard, Federici and Harte have all screwed up.

Not a wind up.

Harte has been the problem all season.

[MmmMonsterMunch]

Ian Harte hasn't put in a decent performance all season.

If that REALLY was the case, don't you think McDermott would have tried Stretch there,
or taken another look at Williams, or played Cummings there and gone out and got someone?

Your remark is a totally ignorant one.

Harte is a long way from a perfect full-back, but we have let in just 24 goals in the 26 games he has played in = .92 goals per game

And when he doesn't play?

We let in 8 goals in six games before he joined, and one in one for the game against Bristol when he did not play. 9 goals conceded in 7 games = 1.29 a game

But heck, let's not let FACTS get in the way of a good wind up

You honestly crack me up at times. You blindly use stats for bloody everything. You're honestly telling me that the extra .37 goals per game beforehand is solely down to Ian Harte not being in the team? Nothing to do with the team bedding in at the start of the season or many other factors then?!

Can you not post an opinion without some BS calc involved? (I'm an accountant by the way)

[LoyalRoyalFan]

Ian Harte hasn't put in a decent performance all season.

If that REALLY was the case, don't you think McDermott would have tried Stretch there,
or taken another look at Williams, or played Cummings there and gone out and got someone?

Your remark is a totally ignorant one.

Harte is a long way from a perfect full-back, but we have let in just 24 goals in the 26 games he has played in = .92 goals per game

And when he doesn't play?

We let in 8 goals in six games before he joined, and one in one for the game against Bristol when he did not play. 9 goals conceded in 7 games = 1.29 a game

But heck, let's not let FACTS get in the way of a good wind up

What are you on about

[Row Z Royal]

Well LoyalRoyalFan is wrong about everything, so that sorts that out.


Harte and Armstrong are about the same over all level, but good at different things. Not fussed which one of them plays, tbh.

[LoyalRoyalFan]

Well LoyalRoyalFan is wrong about everything, so that sorts that out.

[Snowball]

Nevertheless the fact remains, with a 2-3 meter head start a left back who had any pace whatsoever would have got to that ball ahead of Routledge and cleared it, and there would have not been any danger whatsoever.

I used to be able to run 100m very, very quickly indeed.

Age 38 I was still the fastest player in my team.

I knew John Relish who played for Chester and then Newport County (eventually a manager)
and he was renowned as one of the slowest ever players. He used to play with the side
I ran and help with coaching. But when we played I could never catch him, never got a look at the ball.
He reacted MENTALLY faster than I did and always moved in a such way so I had to go round him.

The exact moment when Routledge started running, I didn't see, but any fast winger, if he gets the timing
spot on will beat 99.99% of defenders. The trick is getting up to speed and not going offside. Routledge
did it perfectly LIKE MANY PLAYERS DO FOR MANY SIDES, AND RFC PLAYERS DO. Do you think QPR are
calling for their defender to be sacked because Shane Long ripped him to shreds for speed?

How often does Kebe skin a fullback or centre-back, or leave a midfielder floundering? It must be 2-3-4-5-6 times a game at least.
Do they drop the defenders? Ditto McAnuff, ditto Long. Attackers can beat defences if the pass is perfect and they start their run
just a bit earlier. You either have to stop the pass or buy fullbacks with blistering speed and quick reactions.

Ashley Cole would have caught Routledge. Do you have £20 Million?

[Snowball]

Ian Harte hasn't put in a decent performance all season.

If that REALLY was the case, don't you think McDermott would have tried Stretch there,
or taken another look at Williams, or played Cummings there and gone out and got someone?

Your remark is a totally ignorant one.

Harte is a long way from a perfect full-back, but we have let in just 24 goals in the 26 games he has played in = .92 goals per game

And when he doesn't play?

We let in 8 goals in six games before he joined, and one in one for the game against Bristol when he did not play. 9 goals conceded in 7 games = 1.29 a game

But heck, let's not let FACTS get in the way of a good wind up

If as some clown has just stated, "MOST" of our goals were down to Harte, then with a top FB
presumably we would have conceded say TEN goals in 26 games and be clear top of the league.

NONSENSE. And the guy has scored five.


You honestly crack me up at times. You blindly use stats for bloody everything. You're honestly telling me that the extra .37 goals per game beforehand is solely down to Ian Harte not being in the team? Nothing to do with the team bedding in at the start of the season or many other factors then?!

Can you not post an opinion without some BS calc involved? (I'm an accountant by the way)

You do NOT go 26 games conceding just 24 goals with a passenger at left-back. You simply DON'T

[MmmMonsterMunch]

You haven't answered my question - you've just quoted more stats.

[Snowball]

It's something that has worked very well since Harte has played at left back.


We got caught out there because we are so high up the pitch and narrow.

'greed. Don't think it helped that Ivar was stepping up at the same time, which meant Mills had to come across from the other side. We were well and truely done up like a kipper with that one. Also partly because we got caught out in midfield.

Ideal is completely failing to take notice of the fact that regardless of pace Harte was caught flat-footed and by the pass and run (as was most of the team) and so was always going to be outpaced by Routledge who was already in full flow in the right direction rather than if anything moving the wrong way.

Ian is correct. We KNOW Harte is slow, but good midfield work (OUR midfielders failing)
allows a very good through ball (defenders fail to cut it out - fail) then Mills, NOT the
fastest centre-back in the world, can't get to Routledge, then the keeper (so people say)
didn't do very well with the save.

Look at the pictures and see the running stances. Routledge, whatever his speed, is first
off the mark. We were done by a class move by two classy players.

Yes Harte is slow. If he was quicker he'd still be in the Prem.

It's still a fact that we have only conceded 24 goals in his 26 games. (10 of those goals were in that crazy fortnight where we conceded 3-3-1-3)

So 20 Games conceding 14 goals? The defence, at the level we are at (fringe of the POs) is a very decent one.

Overall we are the 5th-best defence in the league. If you look at Harte's games we are 4th-best, a tiny fraction of third.

That is not an accident.

[Snowball]

You haven't answered my question - you've just quoted more stats.

We have a VERY, VERY good defence when Harte plays.

It is the fourth-best in this league

That is not an accident.

[MmmMonsterMunch]

You still haven't answered my question!

Do you work for the government out of interest?

[Snowball]

You still haven't answered my question!

Do you work for the government out of interest?

The Russian Government

[Ian Royal]

Mills has been at fault for more goals than Harte. He has put in decent performances, but his pace can be a weakness - he is one of the weaker links in the defence.

Given Armstrong isn't a great deal quicker he isn't exactly an instant solution to the problem. Cummings & Williams are quicker, but one is a right back and the other one wasn't good enough early on.

Harte isn't bad enough to warrant instant dropping when we don't have anyone to put in who would obviously do better than him. I'd be inclined to prefer Armstrong - provided he is the same player as a couple of years ago, which he may well not be.

[MmmMonsterMunch]

Seriously?

[paultheroyal]

Forgot to say, who was the presenter and studio guests for the game on Friday?

[West Stand Man]

We have a pretty solid defence and still there are people complaining about individuals in it.

Unbelievable.

[Snowball]

We have a pretty solid defence and still there are people complaining about individuals in it.

Unbelievable.

Sadly it's not unbelievable. It's typical of HNA.


We are always going to let in goals.

We'll get blunders like Harte v Hull,
like Fedrici at Cardiff,
like Federici v Forest,
like Zurab at Preston,
like Zurab not bothering v Norwich,
like Mills pass-back gift to Holt
like Howard's dire penalty v QPR

and on and on it goes.

We are not Barcelona or Man Utd. We are a decent Championship team flirting with the play-offs

Our players are not actually Gods (Except Shane of course)

[Snowball]

Went to the game but I just watched the first half on TV.

Simon Church was truly awful. He did not win a ball for 40 minutes

His first completed pass (one in the half) was in the 40-something-th minute a few seconds before his shot, well hit but straight at the keeper.

He managed a glancing header to nowhere shortly after and the ball was at his feet two yards out and he hit a player with it.

That was it. He looked very easy to defend against. ATM he is not a patch on Hunt and Long is light years ahead of him.

[Hoop Blah]

Harte hasn't had many glaring errors for goals, or even for chances conceded, but I do think we lack a bit of balance with him in the side. He needs covering a little too much at the back but usually you forgive that if that brings an extra dimension to your attack.

Harte doesn't offer too much going forward because he can't catch up with play or commit to an attack with any hope of recovering his ground should we lose possession. He's still a better defender than Williams or Cummings though so it's no surprise he keeps his place over those two. I still think Armstrong hasn't really recovered from his injury (by that I mean able to recapture his old form as much as being 100% physically) or he'd be in the team.

Harte has given us a defensive weakness for teams to exploit at times, and he's almost a passenger in some respects. The thing that annoys me most though is how, for a 'set piece specialist', his deliver from deadball situations has been no better than the likes of Howard or Hunt. He's deadly from the penalty spot and when usually shooting (apart from Friday night) but the rest has been mediocre at best.

[bcubed]

Went to the game but I just watched the first half on TV.

Simon Church was truly awful. He did not win a ball for 40 minutes

His first completed pass (one in the half) was in the 40-something-th minute a few seconds before his shot, well hit but straight at the keeper.

He managed a glancing header to nowhere shortly after and the ball was at his feet two yards out and he hit a player with it.

That was it. He looked very easy to defend against. ATM he is not a patch on Hunt and Long is light years ahead of him.

Very harsh
He doesn't link up well with Long but I still think his runs are better than Long's (have you ever seen Shane attack the near post? Derby at home in 2006 aside) - he is terribly short of confidence though